populace armament is best thought of as a strategic deterrent. the US nuclear arsenal is the strategic deterrent that belongs to the owners of America; the armed US populace is the strategic deterrent that belongs to the people of America
-
-
deterrence isn't about winning, it's about being able to prevent the other guy from winning
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
intuitively agreed. not to mention an entrenched guerrilla force hanging in the rockies or sierras...which reminds me of a random book called Ecotopia where California secedes and defends agains old-US via such tactics.. in reality though, I am not so certain of these outcomes
-
and also "spectrum" of outcomes when waging war of attrition. Afghanistan/Pakistan didn't give up their "populace deterrence" capacity like Iraq or Libya. But I don't know if their current state is better than it would have been if they had.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.